CW's Ranking of Opening Batsmen (Tests)

[kyear2]

Barry

 

[gftw]

Richards - 9
Hayden - 5
Cook - 1
Dhawan - 1

The List
1. Jack Hobbs
2. Len Hutton
3. Sunil Gavaskar
4. Herbert Sutcliffe
5. Geoffrey Boycott
6. Graeme Smith
7. Bob Simpson
8. Gordon Greenidge
9. Virender Sehwag
10. Barry Richards

The vote for the #11 test opener of all-time begins now.

 

[ataraxia]

Morris

 

[ImpatientLime]

Richards was a better test match opener than Gooch, Hayden, Cook, Lawry and so on?....ok.

Andrew Ganteaume votes when?

 

[ImpatientLime]

Cook

 

[trundler]

Wow that's appalling. So Richards is better than Hayden but not Sehwag? Completely senseless.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Hayden

 

[Bitmap]

Hayden

 

[Line and Length]

It's interesting to compare 'The List' to the order in which openers were ranked in the Top 50 Test Batsmen voting. I have removed Trumper from that list as it has since been agree that he was better as a MOB.

The List	From Top 50
1. Jack Hobbs	Hobbs
2. Len Hutton	Hutton
3. Sunil Gavaskar	Gavaskar
4. Herbert Sutcliffe	Sutcliffe
5. Geoffrey Boycott	Boycott
6. Graeme Smith	Simpson
7. Bob Simpson	Smith
8. Gordon Greenidge	Sehwag
9. Virender Sehwag	Hayden
10. Barry Richards	Greenidge

As can been seen, there is little difference until the lower level of the 10 where Barry Richards, somewhat controversially according to many, replaces Hayden. I was a little surprised to see Greenidge climb above Sehwag (and Hayden) as he had an inferior batting average ... but stats aren't everything.

 

[The Sean]

I've not really engaged with this thread for reasons I've already made clear but **** me, Matt Hayden gets underrated in these parts.

And Barry Richards is either better than all of Hayden, Smith, Sehwag, Greenidge and Simpson, or he's better than none of them. Slotting him in above one of those five but behind the other four makes no sense. As per the thread title, this isn't a Test list any more.

 

[ataraxia]

just remove the (Tests) from the title and everything is fine...

(apart from the earlier WG omission, ffs guys)

 

[HookShot]

I've not really engaged with this thread for reasons I've already made clear but **** me, Matt Hayden gets underrated in these parts.

And Barry Richards is either better than all of Hayden, Smith, Sehwag, Greenidge and Simpson, or he's better than none of them. Slotting him in above one of those five but behind the other four makes no sense. As per the thread title, this isn't a Test list any more.

Being classed as the 11th greatest opening batsman of the past 150 years of Test cricket is no bad thing though.

I wouldn’t mind being the 11th greatest opening batsman of the past 150 years.

 

[The Sean]

Being classed as the 11th greatest opening batsman of the past 150 years of Test cricket is no bad thing though.

I wouldn’t mind being the 11th greatest opening batsman of the past 150 years.

Well, that just shows your lack of ambition.

But yeah, fair comment - I've said similar when other people have called blokes they rank highly to be underrated, so I'll cop that. For Hayden it's more in terms of him always seemingly being rated below his great contemporaries and most obvious historical comparators, exacerbated here by him being the only one of that group rated below four-Test Baz on a Test batting list.

My point about Richards compared to the others still stands - I mean, if you ignore the Test criteria and think Barry Richards was simply a better batsman than Matt Hayden then that's fine, but surely if you think that then you would think he was better than Greenidge, Smith or Sehwag too? The people here who voted for all those other blokes, then voted for Barry Richards, but still haven't picked Hayden is what makes no sense to me.

 

[HookShot]

Well, that just shows your lack of ambition.

But yeah, fair comment - I've said similar when other people have called blokes they rank highly to be underrated, so I'll cop that. For Hayden it's more in terms of him always seemingly being rated below his great contemporaries and most obvious historical comparators, exacerbated here by him being the only one of that group rated below four-Test Baz on a Test batting list.

My point about Richards compared to the others still stands - I mean, if you ignore the Test criteria and think Barry Richards was simply a better batsman than Matt Hayden then that's fine, but surely if you think that then you would think he was better than Greenidge, Smith or Sehwag too? The people here who voted for all those other blokes, then voted for Barry Richards, but still haven't picked Hayden is what makes no sense to me.

Hayden couldn’t get into the Test side when Michael Slater was opening with Tubby Taylor, because the consensus was that Slater was the better batsman. At the time I tended to agree, and I still do.

Hayden did finally come good some time after Ambrose/Walsh retired, and then proceeded to make made his name against India.

But I’ve always felt that his over all technique is slightly inferior to Slater, Greenidge, Smith, Sehwag and Richards.

Matthew Hoggard and most quality swing bowlers would agree.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I don’t think anyone would argue against Barry Richards having a better technique than Hayden. The only debate is whether he has a meaningful enough Test record to place him in the all time top ten of Test openers.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Hayden

 

[Nikhil99.99]

Arthur Morris

 

[Coronis]

Hayden

 

[Line and Length]

Hayden

 

[HookShot]

I don’t think anyone would argue against Barry Richards having a better technique than Hayden. The only debate is whether he has a meaningful enough Test record to place him in the all time top ten of Test openers.

It depends on whether you place more emphasis on better of greater.

There’s little doubt that Hayden is a greater batsman than Richards because of his excellent Test record.

But if I had to choose one of them to help me win a Test match against a World Class bowling attack then I’m going to pick the South African every time.

Batsman like Garry Sobers, well they’re both better and greater combined….which is why they‘re at the very top.